Movie News

Face Palm Of The Day: 'Underworld 4'

By:
Sam Morgan

Sep 24, 2010 | 11:18am EDT

Face Palm - (n) The reaction to an idea that is so stupid, so ridiculous, the only remedy is a quick slap of the open hand to the forehead.

Look, I’m all for telling stories in an episodic manner, as long as the stories deserve to be told that way. Harry Potter would not work well as a single story, it has to be told in 7 different parts. The Godfather Part II needed to be told in order to better understand the characters. The Godfather Part III did not need to be told at all.

So why are we getting an Underworld 4? Why did Underworld 3 even exist in the first place?

First, Underworld 3. I happened to like the first Underworld. I thought it was a visually stunning, if not a little Matrix-y, and it told a decent story in the vampire/werewolf mythos before Twilight came in and ruined it for everyone. I made the mistake of taking a date to see Underworld 2, but it was still an interesting movie.

What I didn't understand was the need for Underworld 3. The whole plot of that film was told in flashbacks of the first two movies! We knew what was going to happen the entire time, it didn’t reveal anything new. It was just a pathetic attempt at a cash grab on behalf of the studio.

And now another attempt to draw from the drying well. A script has been written (and rewritten) and Kate Beckinsale (the star of the first two, but whose part was not involved in the third) has signed on to star in Underworld 4. So it’s a good sign that they are returning to the original storyline, but still, I’m not getting good vibes about this. Also Len Wiseman (the director of the first two and Kate Beckinsale’s husband, the lucky bastard) will not be directing. Let’s move on folks. We don’t need this.

Then again, this will give us more Beckinsale in tight leather. Hmm, maybe this won’t be so bad after all.